Editorial: Power play blindsides council

Friday

Nov 30, 2007 at 12:01 AMNov 30, 2007 at 2:40 AM

When Acting Mayor William Whitty took office after Edward M. Lambert’s resignation last month, Whitty was expected to assume a caretaker role, holding down the fort without making substantial change until the next duly elected mayor takes office in January.

Apparently, the City Council president has other ideas.

When Acting Mayor William Whitty took office after Edward M. Lambert’s resignation last month, Whitty was expected to assume a caretaker role, holding down the fort without making substantial change until the next duly elected mayor takes office in January.

Apparently, the City Council president has other ideas.

Whitty took the highly unusual step Tuesday of vetoing City Council legislation, in this case a unanimously approved change to the city’s zoning ordinance. Some understandably perturbed council members such as Alfredo Alves, Linda Pereira and Brad Kilby said they could recall very few cases of a mayor vetoing the council.

"I found it very strange that Whitty did this," Alves said.

"I just feel frustrated with this," Pereira added.

"I was totally blindsided by it," Kilby said. "To be vetoed like that, I think was the wrong thing to do."

Whitty, himself, acknowledged that he could remember no such instances of even an elected mayor vetoing the council. Lambert only used the option once in his 12 years in office. The council overrode the veto.

The legislation in question was instigated by citizens group Save our Neighborhoods. It would alter the zoning ordinance in several ways: New housing units outside the central business district would be required to have onsite parking; special permits instead of variances would be used to exempt historic properties that do not conform to zoning laws; and nonconforming buildings left vacant for two years would not be granted a new use greater than its previous use.

The council, with Whitty presiding, unanimously approved the changes Oct. 23 and Nov. 13. Whitty abstained from voting and did not engage in discussion leading to the vote. His first remarks on the proposal came in his veto letter, which he submitted as the 90-day deadline for a proposal to become law expired, precluding the council from attempting to override.

In explaining his actions, Whitty said the legislation amounts to "piecemeal amendments to the city’s zoning ordinances, which contain flaws that require further review."

True, the city’s zoning ordinance does need to be examined and overhauled, but the repairs have to start somewhere. A piecemeal approach to reform is better than no reform at all. Enacting the changes contained in the Save our Neighborhoods proposal would not preclude future mayors and councils from further amending the ordinance.

If Whitty had objections to the proposal, he should have voiced them on the floor of the council before a vote was taken. Instead, he waited until his was the only voice that mattered.

Whitty will occupy the sixth floor for just more than another month. Is he going to treat his position as the caretaker role it is intended to be, or is he going to use the position for one last grasp of power before leaving public office?